Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 22:20 UTC

microsoft / mu_plus

Project Mu Microsoft Core UEFI Value

CCustom license★ 265 stars⑂ 131 forkssince Sep 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

microsoft/mu_plus holds a health index of 96 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (97/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (71/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

96
overall / 100
Exceptional

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

96
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 84 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MicrosoftOrganization · verified domain
129,587 followers8,301 public repossince Dec 2013

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

97Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
31.2/36Commit cadence — 45/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 151 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year151
human_commit_share0.71
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year45

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~17.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2025110003.0.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases17.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.3/60Stars — 265 stars
17.6/25Forks — 131 forks
7.1/15Watchers — 20 watchers
Inputs used
forks131
stars265
watchers20
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100

Community health

86Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

91Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 22% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 69 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled69
top_contributor_share0.219
How it's scored
39/42Issue resolution — 93% of issues closed
24.9/30PR acceptance — 713/859 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs713
open_issues5
closed_issues64
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.928
closed_unmerged_prs146
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 129,587 followers of microsoft
25/25Track record — 8,301 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers129,587
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginmicrosoft
public_repos8,301
account_age_days4,659

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 16 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 24 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://microsoft.github.io/mu/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfirmware, uefi, projectmu, uefi-development
has_wikino
homepagehttps://microsoft.github.io/mu/
docs_sitehttps://microsoft.github.io/mu/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

82Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 24 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
4/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

71Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 67 of 71 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.944
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — AdvLoggerPkg/Crates/RustAdvancedLoggerDxe/Cargo.toml, Cargo.toml, HidPkg/Crates/HidIo/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — C (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 16 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsAdvLoggerPkg/Crates/RustAdvancedLoggerDxe/Cargo.toml, Cargo.toml, HidPkg/Crates/HidIo/Cargo.toml, HidPkg/Crates/HiiKeyboardLayout/Cargo.toml, HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml, HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml, MsCorePkg/Crates/RustBootServicesAllocatorDxe/Cargo.toml, MsWheaPkg/Crates/MuTelemetryHelperLib/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.16
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C (statically typed)
52.2/55Manageable file sizes — 34/661 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC
largest_source_bytes719,599
source_files_sampled661
oversized_source_files34

Key facts

265GitHub stars
69contributors
151commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
100releases
4bus factor
5open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2026-07-11: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 265 stars today.
  • Could not fetch crates package 'UefiHidDxe' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'UefiHidDxeV2' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 264 ★ / 131 ⇿
264Stars
131Forks
99Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

Star history is shown as collected on 2026-07-11. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

050100150200250300264129122018-092022-092026-08
Major 21Minor 10Patch 55

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.8 / 10
7.8aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-12 22:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests24 out of 24 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioHidIo—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.iohidparser—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.ioHiiKeyboardLayout—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.iomemoffset—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.ior-efi—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.iorustversion—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.ioRustBootServicesAllocatorDxe—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.ioRustAdvancedLoggerDxe—HidPkg/UefiHidDxe/Cargo.toml
crates.ioHidIo—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.iohidparser—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.ioHiiKeyboardLayout—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.iopatina—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.ior-efi—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.ioRustAdvancedLoggerDxe—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
crates.ioscroll—HidPkg/UefiHidDxeV2/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 6

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 6 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetMicrosoft.Windows.CppWinRT2.0.240111.5indirect
PyPIantlr4-python3-runtime4.13.2indirect
PyPIedk2-pytool-extensions0.31.1indirect
PyPIedk2-pytool-library0.23.16indirect
PyPIpygount3.2.0indirect
PyPIregex2026.7.19indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics.